DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/19/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
The Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 02/19/2026, has been entered. Claim 11 is amended; claims 12-15 stand as originally or previously presented; and claims 1-10 are withdrawn. Support for the amendments is found in the original filing, and there is no new matter.
Upon considered said amendments and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C.103 rejection set forth in Office Action mailed 11/20/2025 has been withdrawn. Amended and new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 citing to new and the originally cited art are set forth below as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (CN 108448096 A, hereinafter Cheng), in view of Kim et al. (US 20200280060 A1, hereinafter Kim) and Sheem et al. (US 20040214087 A1, hereinafter Sheem).
Regarding Claim 11, Cheng discloses the limitations regarding a negative electrode active material (Cheng, negative electrode material, [0011]) comprising a carbonaceous core (Cheng, a core-shell amorphous carbon-based composite material, wherein the core of the composite material is an amorphous carbon material, [0014]), a first carbon coating layer on the carbonaceous core (Cheng, the first shell is a carbon-silicon coating layer, [0014]), and a second carbon coating layer on the first carbon coating layer (Cheng, the second shell is a carbon coating layer, [0014]).
Cheng is silent regarding the negative electrode active material has a total pore volume of 0.003 cm3/g to 0.010 cm3/g, and wherein the carbonaceous core comprises secondary particles formed by aggregated flaky natural graphite.
Kim discloses a negative electrode active material (Kim, negative active material composite, Abstract) comprising a carbonaceous core (Kim, a core, wherein the core includes crystalline carbon, amorphous carbon and silicon nanoparticles, Abstract), and
a first carbon coating layer on the carbonaceous core (Kim, a coating layer around the core, the coating layer includes amorphous carbon, Abstract),
wherein the negative electrode active material has a total pore volume of 0.003 cm3/g to 0.010 cm3/g (Kim, a total pore volume of the negative active material composite may be less than or equal to about 3.0 x 10-2 cm3/g, or 0.03 cm3/g, [0023]; the disclosed range of less than or equal to about or 0.03 cm3/g overlaps with the claimed range of 0.003 cm3/g to 0.010 cm3/g).
Kim teaches that the pore volume formed inside the negative active material composite is controlled or selected to suppress or reduce side reaction(s) between the electrolyte and the silicon nanoparticles, thereby providing a rechargeable lithium battery having improved initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics (Kim, [0028]).
Cheng and Kim are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a negative electrode active material having a core-shell structure. Further, Cheng and Kim are directed towards improving battery performance and cycle performance (Cheng, [0011]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to routinely design the negative electrode active material of Cheng to have a pore volume of less than or equal to about 3.0 x 10-2 cm3/g, or 0.03 cm3/g, as taught by Kim, in order to improve initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics of the battery. In addition, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Sheem discloses a negative electrode active material (Sheem, negative active material for a rechargeable lithium battery material, Abstract) comprising a carbonaceous core (Sheem, a negative active material of the present invention includes a core, [0022]), wherein the carbonaceous core comprises secondary particles (Sheem, the core is formed with secondary particles, wherein the secondary particle is produced by agglomerating at least one primary particle, [0023]) formed by aggregated flaky natural graphite (Sheem, the core includes a crystalline carbon, an amorphous carbon, and a mixture thereof, and the crystalline carbon is flaked and may be natural graphite, [0029]).
Sheem teaches that a negative electrode active material exhibits advantages of both a crystalline carbon and an amorphous carbon, especially in which an agglomeration process is used. The advantages are improved capacity and efficiency (Sheem, [0041-0042]).
Modified Cheng and Sheem are analogous to the current invention as they are both directed towards a negative electrode active material comprising a carbonaceous core.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the carbonaceous core of modified Cheng to use agglomerated flaked, natural graphite as the crystalline carbon, as taught by Sheem, in order to improve capacity and efficiency of the battery.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Cheng discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cheng discloses the limitations regarding a negative electrode active material (Cheng, negative electrode material, [0011]), having a BET specific surface area of 0.5 m2/g to 2.0 m2/g (Cheng, the specific surface area of the composite material of 1.2 m2/g to 6 m2/g, [0024]; the disclosed range of 1.2 m2/g to 6 m2/g overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5 m2/g to 2.0 m2/g).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Cheng discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cheng discloses the limitations regarding a negative electrode active material (Cheng, negative electrode material, [0011]), wherein the carbonaceous core has an average particle diameter (D50) of 7 µm to 25 µm (Cheng, the emdian particle size of the core is 9 μm to 15 μm, [0020]; the disclosed range of 9 μm to 15 μm falls within the claimed range of 7 µm to 25 µm).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Cheng discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cheng discloses the limitations regarding a negative electrode comprising the negative electrode active material (Cheng, negative electrode was obtained from a mixture comprising of a negative electrode material, conductive agent, and binder, [0118]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Cheng discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cheng discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery comprising the negative electrode (Cheng, a lithium-ion battery made from the composite material as the negative electrode material, [0011]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02/19/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 11-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cheng et al. (CN 108448096 A, hereinafter Cheng), in view of Kim et al. (US 20200280060 A1, hereinafter Kim) and Sheem et al. (US 20040214087 A1, hereinafter Sheem), as noted above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20110281180 A1 discloses a negative electrode active material comprising a crystalline carbon core, wherein the crystalline carbon may be agglomerated flake-shaped natural graphite [0036-0037,0063].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752